The purpose of this paper by Nguyen Minh Ngoc is to analyze the actors and new thoughts in Chinese foreign policy and implications of China’s policies for South China Sea. The author would like to offer readers with the policy-making process of new foreign policy of China, which helps Vietnamese more aware of the situation and find appropriate solutions.

In carrying out the research, the author has studied and analyzed the essays, articles, books, researches by researchers and experts on the foreign policy of China. The paper will explain how the changes in the subjects in the foreign policy of China can result in their actions in the South China Sea. Therefore, Vietnam will acknowledge the opportunities and challenges in its relations with China, thus the former can adjust the relations in favor of itself.

The purpose of this paper by Nguyen Minh Ngoc is to analyze the actors and new thoughts in Chinese foreign policy and implications of China’s policies for South China Sea. The author would like to offer readers with the policy-making process of new foreign policy of China, which helps Vietnamese more aware of the situation and find appropriate solutions.

In the process of seeking measures to the disputes in the South China Sea, UNCLOS 1982 and the related international legal documents are the creditable legal basis despite their drawbacks. Therefore, the reality approaches are crucial. First, the following article analyzes the pros and cons of taking UNCLOS as the legal basis.

How China uses international law in South China Sea disputes by Nguyen Thi Lan Anh

In the process ofmaterializing itshegemonicambitionsinthe South China Sea, China hasalways shownconcernsandwishesto useinternational lawasthe basisfortheirclaimsin theParacel Islandsand Spratly Islands as well as the claims of sovereignty, sovereignrightsand jurisdiction inthewaters withinitsU-shaped line. In fact, the Chinese hasgivena lot ofargumentsandcitedthelegal elements as well as historical evidence to explaintheclaims which appear to belogical butstill arouse muchambiguityanddoubt. From the legal aspects, the following articlecarefully analyzedthelegal basis that Chinaput forward toexplaintheir claims of sovereignty in accordance with articles from sourcesof international law, especially UNCLOS, as well ascarefully consideredthehistorical evidences so as to cometo the conclusionsas follow: (1) statementsaboutthelegal basisandthe respect forinternational lawof China in the South China Sea’s disputeseems to merely exist in words(2), what China claimsremainsvagueandlackslegal basis, orthey simplyhave nolegitimacy as China’s always explained. It can be referred from the article that South China Sea, orelse it’s merelytheapplication ofanother"international law” which is different fromthe commonunderstandingof the international community.

Learning about the legal status of islands in the delimitation of sea areas helps identify which legal status for the two Paracel and Spratly islands related to spatial planning in the South China Sea. This document, based on the analysis of the United Nations Convention Law of the Sea 1982 linking with two islands: Paracel and Spratly, comes to confirm: “Paracel and Spratly” islands are not "archipelagos" or "archipelagic States" so people can not establish the baselines for these islands. According to that, there can only be internal waters and territorial waters for these islands. After conducting the study, three legal requirements have been raised: 1) Affirming the islands in two areas Paracel and Spratly belongs to Vietnam, 2) Reaffirming the fact that Paracel and Spratly Islands have no exclusive economic zone and continental shelf of their own; 3) Not Allowing to draw "archipelagic baselines" for each island and give the Chinese side a pretext to strengthen "U-shaped line” claim. This paper is an important contribution on the legal path toward Vietnam's sovereignty claims over the East Sea.

The South China Sea disputes have lasted for 40 years. But in the recent months, those disputes have been escalated suddenly because of China’s initiatives claiming its sovereignty over the Paracel and Spratly islands. China has produced a series of proofs to claim its national interest in the South China Sea. Some of the South East Asia nations, including Vietnam, have made no concession to China.

The study of the author points out the historical and scientific evidences from both Vietnam and China in order to prove that the arguments that China use to claim their sovereignty over the Paracel and Spratly were unfounded. With the historical method, the author demonstrates that through all of history periods, Vietnam’s sovereignty was definitely proved and all arguments of China were extremely inaccurate.

The study is divided into two parts: Historical evidences (in both Vietnam and China history), scientific basis to reject China’s claims including the Chinese “U-shaped” line map which was submitted to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf of United Nations. The author hopes that it would bring a bright future in solving Vietnamese-Chinese territorial dispute in the South China Sea.